Social Feeds

What if Ford had bought Ferrari?

Almost exactly 45 years ago this month, Henry Ford II thought he had a deal. Nine months of negotiation were over, and on July 4, 1963, Hank the Deuce was planning to be in Maranello signing a $10 million deal with Enzo Ferrari that would give Ford Motor Company a half share in the storied Italian sports-car maker. As Time reported in its May 24 issue of that year: "To mark the partnership, the two companies have already started design work on a new, prestigious 'Ferrari-Ford,' which will have a powerful 12-cylinder engine in a Ford sports chassis.&quotThe deal never happened. The Ferrari-Ford was never built. Enzo Ferrari pulled the pin on the deal at the last minute, leaving Ford high and dry.We all know what happened next: An enraged Henry authorized the development of the Ford GT40, with the express goal of humiliating Enzo's blood-red sports racers in the Le Mans 24 Hour race. Which it duly did, four times in a row from 1966.I started thinking about this while en route to Le Mans for the 24-Hour this weekend. And then I started wondering: What if Enzo hadn't backed out of the deal? What if Ford Motor Company had ended up owning Ferrari? And the more I thought about it, the more fun I had rewriting history.There are dozens of different scenarios that could have played out, had the deal gone through. Here are just a few:* Bernie Ecclestone would not be running Formula 1 today.
One of Enzo Ferrari's prime motivations for seeking the Ford deal was to secure funding for his racing operations. Il Commendatore viewed his road car business almost as an afterthought -- racing was his real passion. With a vested interest in the Ferrari F1 team, Ford would have had no incentive to develop the 3.0L Cosworth DFV V-8, one of the most successful racing engines of all time. And without the Cosworth DFV, the organization Bernie Ecclestone used to ultimately gain control of F1's commercial activities, might never have come into being.With a handful of exceptions, Grand Prix racing had always been dominated by factory-backed teams that built complete cars and used racing to promote their road car businesses. The Cosworth DFV changed all that. Developed using Ford money, and first raced in 1967, the Cosworth DFV allowed scrappy privateer British outfits like Lotus, McLaren, Williams, Tyrrell, and Brabham to compete successfully against the old-school grandee teams like Ferrari, Matra, and Alfa Romeo. The privateer team owners formed FOCA to represent their interests, and Ecclestone, then the owner of Brabham, became its chief executive -- with Max Mosley as legal advisor -- in 1978. And the rest, as they say, is history.* There would be Prancing Horse badges on a Mustang
Though its recent record is far from stellar (how many fingers are being crossed in Dearborn right now that the Flex is, finally, truly, absolutely, The One?) Ford has had a rare talent for surfing the automotive zeitgeist -- Model T; Model A; '49 Ford; Mustang; Taurus; F-150; Explorer. But it doesn't have the faintest clue about how to manage brands. Exhibit A: Jaguar. There are dozens of examples of FoMoCo's total lack of understanding of what Jaguar was, and what it could be, but for me it's the fact it took seven years for design chief Ian Callum to get the Jaguar he wanted on the road.Against that background, it's difficult to imagine how Ford "management" would have benefitted Ferrari. I suspect the business would have been left pretty much alone at first, largely because the folks in Dearborn would have found everything -- the language, the work practices, the food -- so alien. But eventually the beancounters and the marketing mavens would have started poking around the business. There'd have been Taurus switchgear in the Testarossa (instead of Fiat) and talk of a small Ferrari. And then one day in the 1970s, someone in a meeting room in the Glasshouse would have had a brilliant idea: "Why don't we do a Ferrari-edition Mustang? It's just like Ghia, only sporty..."* Ferrari today would be more like Porsche
One thing Ford did right at Jaguar was improve the company's manufacturing capability. The first Ford-appointed Jaguar boss, a hard-bitten manufacturing expert called Bill Hayden, once famously compared the company's production line with a Russian tractor factory. And with some justification: A Jaguar insider once confessed to me that shortly after the Ford takeover, the Brits had sent their three best cars over to Dearborn for a quality audit. The best of the three had 10 times the defects of a Taurus.Ferrari builds just over 5000 cars a year now; Porsche close to 50,000. Ferrari's road car production was almost a cottage industry back in 1963, and it's highly likely Ford would have quickly moved to standardize manufacturing systems and processes (Ford invented this stuff, after all) and also to increase volume, because to a company that invented mass production, Ferrari's output would have seemed too tiny and too much a waste of potential revenue. That would have eventually meant cheaper, smaller Ferraris, and, in the fullness of time, possibly even a Ferrari SUV. Don't laugh. Back in 1963 no one at Porsche figured they'd be building one, either.These are just three possible alternative realities from this single what if? moment. Tell me yours.

If Ford bought Ferrari we wouldn't have had Gt 40's or the recent GT. wat a shame that would have been. They were both Ferrari killers at the fraction of the price. The Mustang GT 500s and Z0-6 Corvettes are still doing it at a price we can afford. 20 yrs from now if a 2008 Ferrari and Mustang are sitting next to each other, the comment from ad observer would be "what is this car, its neet, WOW look at this Mustang". AMERICAN MUSCLE

While Ford didn't ruin Aston Martin, Ulrich Bez certainly did. He has turned Aston from the last of the bespoke manufacturers into mere automotive jewelry. Aston martin made it's reputation on custom made BRITISH cars, hand made with in house engines. Now Aston engines are made in a Ford plant in Germany? Steyr to build the Rapide? This is NOT Aston Martin.Sure they are pretty and they perform well. The Might even be the best cars made with an Aston badge. But they are certainly not the best Astons. Aston Martin, RIP.

If the sale would have went through the world of motorsports would be a very different place, the great Ford victories would have never taken place, Enzo's desire to be on top again would not have inspired all the great cars we have had since. Ford and Ferrari are the two greatest motorsports brands of all time. The legacy of Ford racecars and Ford powered racecars would have never happened. Enzo did the right thing.

DDAVVIIDD, how could Ferrari have followed Aston Martin's road? When Ford was trying to buy Ferrari, Ferrari was an up and coming auto maker that was successful. When Ford bought Aston Martin, Aston Martin barely existed. Whether you like Ford or not, the facts all show Ford saved Aston Martin from extinction.

I doubt this marriage would have lasted. Ford's interest in Le Mans was fleeting, so I can't imagine this resulting in more than one Ferrari-Ford joint effort. The Ford of the '60s was not the Nasser-led Ford of the '90s. Ferrari would have quickly become Ford of Europe's problem in terms of development. Given the overall Ford picture of the era that followed, it would have been sold by '82 if the didn't ruin it alltogether.

Giefer, you are so wrong it's hard to know where to start. Aston, before Ford, was selling just a handful of cars. It was Ford who provided the money to Ulrich Bez so he could build the cars Aston offers now: Vantage, DB9, etc. Aston is now selling 7k a year, so you should keep your mouth shut until you do some research.Land Rover is doing well, but Jaguar is foundering and Volvo is a mixed bag. To say Ford has ruined these brands is hardly true; Jaguar was already a mess. Volvo's problem is that they are trapped between worlds. They don't have the cachet to compete with BMW and Mercedes, but no one thinks they are more special than higher-end brands like Acura.As for Ferrari almost being a part of Ford, I think Henry Ford II would have left it alone --he would have just liked the idea of owning the brand-- but once he left for greener pastures (so to speak) who knows how the Prancing Horse would have fared. It's safe to say Enzo would have protected the Scuderia, however, at all costs.

Jaguar had a bunch of crap models when Ford bought them, now they have the XK and XF, both of which are very competetive in their classes. Aston Martin sold 32 cars a year before Ford bought them, now they sell 4000. Yup, Ford ruined these companies. I mean, any time you increase production by 10,000% you must have failed.Anybody who thinks Aston Martin would even exist today if Ford didn't buy them is kidding themself. Even Jaguar may have went belly-up without Ford.

I think Mr. MacKenzie left one big factor out of his musings: Enzo Ferrari. I can't see him ever agreeing to do a Ferrari edition of the Mustang, and he probably would have resisted becoming a volume brand as well. Whatever else he was, Enzo was fiercely controlling of his nameplate and company. He loved his cars, eventually even his road-going red headed stepchildren. I think it would have been a battle royal between Enzo and Ford management.I also don't see that deal ending like Aston Martin or Jaguar. Ferrari is one of the few ultra luxury brands that is consistently profitable. They know how to build, how to market, and what to charge. If Ford gave them a light hand like Fiat has, they probably would have done well.

It just wasn't meant to be and things have continued to evolve in their separate ways to this point. Ensuring two distinct and historic brands that both have plenty of stories worth telling, why bother making new ones up. I call it fate through evolution.

You people all forgot that before Ford bought these brands they were junk and returning no profit. They only became REAL companies after Ford was done with them. Ford definately did not ruin them and the market analysists will tell you the same

If Ford had bought Ferrari then they would have never had the honor of defeating them 4 years in a row, that right there is enough for me to say I'm glad the deal fell through, besides I think Ford's route of relatively larger displacement 8-cylinder engines is a better choice than the extremely small displacement 12 and up cylinders of Ferrari, just take a look at the Ford GT, its hard to beat the torque of a V-8

Ferrari doesn't make the fastest cars, but all their cars are among the best in the world. Ferrari sells based on the attraction of being elite. If Ford did manage to buy Ferrari and mass produce them, Ferrari would have lost all of its splendor and exclusiveness!

I can't even dare think about that. Ford has ruined many of the car companies it bought - Aston Martin for example, only sold on average about 200-500 cars a year through the time it was owned by Ford. I could not think about the damage that Ford would do to Ferrari.

Like Winzer, I can't imagine what either company would be like had the deal gone through. I suspect that Ferrari would probably no longer be a Ford division or it's likely that Ford would probably have combined it with de Tomaso and his car operation (assuming that Ford would still have linked up w/Alejandro de Tomaso) and you'd end up with a Ferrari Pantera (or is it the other way around?). Truth be told, this is one of those times when backing out of a deal was best for all concerned. For Ferrari it would have meant dilution of a brand and for Ford it would have likely meant sinking a royal sum into a niche brand and not realizing the return on investment in a 'timely' manner. This, in turn, would probably lead to a great deal of finger-pointing, acromony and a parting of the ways (this being said with the benefit of hindsight).

I can't help but think though, about the brands that have been in the Ford family for longer durations, such as Mercury and Lincoln. I fear that they would have held on too long to Ferrari and made it a badge engineered wreck. However, there would also be the chance that soon after buying it Ford would tire of it, and sell it off, but that is more of a modern symptom of Ford management.

It's hard to say what would Ford or Ferrari be like today if the deal had went through. I can't help but think of Ford's ownership of Volvo and past ownership of Land Rover and Jaguar. We all know what happened to Land Rover and Jaguar. And Volvo is, well...they make good cars but it just seems like they're hanging around in the background not doing much. Maybe Ferrari would be in the same situation, losing much of its greatness and possibly ending up on the chopping block just like Jag/LR.